Allegations: Marginalization of employers’ associations and their exclusion from
decision making, thereby precluding social dialogue, tripartism and consultation in general
(particularly in respect of highly important legislation directly affecting employers) and
failing to comply with recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association; acts of
violence, discrimination and intimidation against employers’ leaders and their
organizations; detention of leaders; legislation that conflicts with civil liberties and
with the rights of employers’ organizations and their members; a violent assault on
FEDECAMARAS headquarters, resulting in damage to property and threats against employers; and
a bomb attack on FEDECAMARAS headquarters
- 687. The Committee last examined this case at its May–June 2017 session,
when it submitted an interim report to the Governing Body [see 382nd Report, approved by
the Governing Body at its 330th Session (June 2017), paras 602–627].
- 688. The complainant organizations presented new allegations in a
communication dated 8 May 2017.
- 689. The Government sent its observations in a communication received on
2 October 2017.
- 690. The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela has ratified the Freedom of
Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the
Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).
A. Previous examination of the case
A. Previous examination of the case- 691. At its June 2017 meeting, the Committee made the following interim
recommendations regarding the allegations presented by the complainant organizations
[see 382nd Report, para. 627]:
- (a) While once again expressing
its deep concern at the various and serious forms of stigmatization and intimidation
by the Bolivarian authorities, groups and organizations directed against
FEDECAMARAS, its member organizations, their leaders and affiliated companies, the
Committee insists on the urgency of the Government taking strong measures to prevent
such actions and statements against individuals and organizations that are
legitimately defending their interests under Conventions Nos 87 and 98, which have
been ratified by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. The Committee strongly urges
the Government to take all necessary measures to ensure that FEDECAMARAS is able to
exercise its rights as an employers’ organization in a climate that is free from
violence, pressure or threats of any kind against its leaders and members and to
promote, together with that organization, social dialogue based on respect.
- (b) As regards the abduction and mistreatment in 2010 of
FEDECAMARAS leaders Mr Noel Álvarez, Mr Luis Villegas, Mr Ernesto Villamil and Ms
Albis Muñoz (the latter sustained three bullet wounds), the Committee urges the
Government to send a copy of the ruling by which one of the accused was sentenced
and to state whether other people were charged (providing information on any related
proceedings and the outcome thereof) and whether FEDECAMARAS and the leaders
concerned received compensation for the damage caused by these illegal acts. As
regards the February 2008 bomb attack on FEDECAMARAS headquarters, the Committee
again insists that the Government send its observations on the points raised by
FEDECAMARAS and, in particular, on the outcome of the appeal against the closing of
the case and on any investigation carried out in order to determine whether anyone
else was involved in the attack, and thus to shed light on its motive and to prevent
any recurrence.
- (c) As regards the structured bodies for
bipartite and tripartite social dialogue that need to be established in the country,
the plan of action to be established in consultation with the social partners with
stages and specific time frames for implementation with the technical assistance of
the ILO, as recommended by the Governing Body, and the seizure of farms, land
recoveries, occupations and expropriations to the detriment of current or former
employers’ leaders, the Committee deeply deplores the lack of information and
further progress in this regard. It recalls that the conclusions of the mission
refer to a round table between the Government and FEDECAMARAS, with the presence of
the ILO, and a tripartite dialogue round table, with the participation of the ILO
and an independent chairperson. The Committee also recalls that at its March 2017
session, in examining the complaint presented under article 26 of the ILO
Constitution against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela alleging non-compliance
with Conventions Nos 26, 87 and 144, the Governing Body urged the Government to
institutionalize without delay a tripartite round table, with the presence of the
ILO, to foster social dialogue for the resolution of all pending issues, including
matters relating to the seizure of farms, land recoveries, occupations and
expropriations to the detriment of current or former employers’ leaders. The
Committee insists on the urgency of the Government adopting immediately tangible
measures with regard to bipartite and tripartite social dialogue as requested by the
high-level tripartite mission and the Governing Body. Deeply deploring that the
Government has not yet provided the requested plan of action, the Committee once
again urges it to implement fully without delay the conclusions of the high-level
tripartite mission endorsed by the Governing Body and to report thereon.
- (d) The Committee, in line with the conclusions of the high-level
tripartite mission, again urges the Government to take immediate action to create a
climate of trust based on respect for employers’ and trade union organizations with
a view to promoting solid and stable industrial relations. The Committee urges the
Government to inform it of any measures taken in this regard.
- (e) The Committee, having noted the Government’s observations
concerning the allegations of detention and trial of employers and leaders in
various sectors, deeply deplores that once again a full answer has not been provided
in relation to the individuals who are the subject of investigation procedures. As
regards the cases of the meat processing company and the supermarket chain, the
Committee urges the Government not merely to give an indication of general criminal
offences but to indicate the specific allegations against each of the people under
investigation or trial by the judicial authorities and to provide precise
information on the progress of the respective judicial proceedings. Furthermore, in
the case of the meat processing company, the Committee urges the Government to state
whether these employers and leaders have been subjected to precautionary or
detention measures and again requests the authorities to consider lifting any
preventive detention measures imposed on them.
- (f) As
regards the adoption by the President of the Republic of numerous decree-laws on
important economic and production-related issues without consulting FEDECAMARAS,
deeply deploring that the Government has not made any observations concerning their
impact on social dialogue and the persistent nature of this situation, the Committee
firmly urges that full consultations on draft legislation covering labour, economic
or social matters that affect their interests and those of their members be held
without delay with the most representative organizations of workers and employers,
including FEDECAMARAS.
- (g) The Committee expresses its
deep concern at the lack of information and progress on the above issues and urges
the Government to take all the requested measures without delay.
- (h) The Committee will examine the new allegations, made by the
IOE and FEDECAMARAS and the reply of the Government thereto at its next meeting and
requests the Government to send further relevant observations in this
respect.
- (i) The Committee draws the special attention of
the Governing Body to the extremely serious and urgent nature of this
case.
B. The complainants’ allegations
B. The complainants’ allegations- 692. In their communication of 8 May 2017, the IOE and FEDECAMARAS
denounce new violations of the principles of freedom of association and the absence of
effective social dialogue. The complainants denounce that spokespersons for or linked to
the Government have continued to attack FEDECAMARAS, its leaders and the business
sector. They provided numerous examples of unsubstantiated and intimidating accusations
and threats made through the media by, among others, the Deputy Chairperson of the
government party – a member of parliament who was appointed to the Government as
co-leader of the National Anti-Coup Committee for Peace and Sovereignty – and the
President of the Republic himself. The complainants also denounce attacks on the
employers’ sector by government authorities, including threats of imprisonment,
assaults, arrests of leaders, employees and shareholders, accusing them of corruption or
economic destabilization and subjecting them to public ridicule without guaranteeing due
process and their right of defence: they refer, in particular, to the imposition of
orders to reduce prices (with detention of employees) and confiscation of goods
(combined with threats to initiate criminal proceedings against the President of
FEDECAMARAS, alleging that the latter described one of the cases of confiscation as
theft, which is untrue); looting in the stores of the State of Bolívar, and the
detention and referral for trial before the military courts of representatives of the
leading credit card transaction company, in relation to faults in the operation of the
system (accusing them of treason); and arbitrary measures against bakeries with the
support of the security forces (without respecting the right of defence and resulting in
the occupation of some bakeries).
- 693. The complainant organizations also denounce the absence of effective
dialogue and reiterate that the dialogue processes which the Government had announced
before the Governing Body of the ILO have not been put in place (neither the action plan
that provided for social dialogue nor the inclusion of FEDECAMARAS in a socio-economic
dialogue round table have taken place). The complainants denounce that FEDECAMARAS has
been excluded through new governmental measures having an impact on business performance
and undermining freedom of association. In this regard, the complainants referred to the
approval, without consultation, of the purchase from farmers of 50 per cent of
agro-industrial production for use by local supply and production committees. The
complainants also denounce the creation, without consultation, of the Workers’
Production Boards (WPBs), with three employees’ representatives from the enterprise and
four from the State, which constitutes an additional mechanism for state interference
(as these are subject to the guidelines of the Government, with the presence and support
of the armed forces). The complainants further pointed out that among the
representatives of the State, one belongs to the Bolivarian Armed Forces, one to the
Bolivarian militias, one is a youth representative and one belongs to the National
Women’s Union. The complainants denounce the presentation of the WPBs by the People’s
Ministry of Labour and Social Security (MPPPST), according to which the WPBs have been
conceived as a civil–military union for the professional, technical and political
training of workers and they must have the support of all trade union organizations. The
complainants refer to Decree No. 17 of 8 November 2016 on the creation of the WPBs,
issued under the state of emergency for economic hardship. The complainants further
denounce the creation of the General Staff of the Working Class (a government
organization to strengthen the WPBs) and the Labour Feminist Brigades (a body to promote
control of the entire social process of work in each company), as well as other
strategies for using the country’s labour movement in support of the Government and
against employers, in violation of freedom of association. In addition to these bodies,
the complainants referred to the complex structure of highly politicized state
organizations with which companies must interact (including various supervisory bodies
such as the National Superintendence for the Defence of Socio-economic Rights) thereby
limiting the freedom of action of employers and workers, making it virtually impossible
for enterprises to conduct normal business activities and rendering ineffective the
exercise of freedom of association. The complainants also stressed that heavy state
intervention and interference limit the operational capacity of employers and have led
to a decrease in the number of enterprises and the consequent loss of decent jobs –
largely because of the absence of social dialogue with the most representative actors in
the country in relation to the adoption of macroeconomic measures and of policies that
ensure the sustainability of enterprises and jobs. The complainants further denounce
that another economic emergency decree was enacted on 13 September 2016 (and, once
again, its wording is part of the Government’s campaign to stigmatize the business and
trade union sectors – attributing the poverty suffered by the Venezuelan population to
an economic war allegedly waged by certain sectors of the national economy – including
repressive measures against the employers), as well as the approval, without
consultation, of increases in the minimum wage and the cestaticket (food voucher) in
January and April 2017 and February 2017, respectively.
- 694. The complainants allege that notwithstanding the fact that written
communications were exchanged and meetings held between FEDECAMARAS and the MPPPST
(specifically, on 11 and 31 January and 27 April 2017), these meetings, which were held
in a climate of institutional respect, were purely formal in nature, did not take place
within structured dialogue mechanisms or in a climate of sufficient trust between the
parties to support the realization of effective dialogue and were carried out
simultaneously with the aforementioned intimidating attacks on FEDECAMARAS, its
affiliated organizations and its leaders, adding that the invitations to attend these
meetings were couched in intimidating terms by the Minister in the media. The
complainants further state that: (i) although the MPPPST admitted at the meeting of 9
January 2017 that the consultation regarding the increase in the minimum wage in January
2017 had been omitted and that, by a letter of 14 February 2017, FEDECAMARAS had been
requested to express its views on the policy of minimum wage increases (to which
FEDECAMARAS responded on 23 February 2017), on 24 February, the increase impacting the
food benefits was published without due tripartite consultation; and (ii) although at
the meeting held on 27 April 2017 the Minister asked for suggestions regarding the
following salary increase, FEDECAMARAS was unable to express specific considerations or
participate in an effective dialogue thereon because the MPPPST did not transmit to it
any specific terms or elements regarding the increase under consideration and, again, an
increase in the minimum wage was adopted on 30 April 2017 without tripartite
consultation. Despite this, FEDECAMARAS reiterates once again its general complaints
that isolated wage increases do not solve the problem of the workers’ loss of purchasing
power and that comprehensive measures are required. Finally, the complainants point out,
in relation to the National Council on the Productive Economy, that while it is possible
that one of its chambers of commerce or employers might participate in a meeting on a
one-time basis, FEDECAMARAS as an institution is still not a member of the
aforementioned Council.
C. The Government’s reply
C. The Government’s reply- 695. In a communication dated 23 May 2017, the Government had provided
its observations replying to the allegations of the complainant organizations of 8 May
2017. Regarding the allegations of intimidating attacks on FEDECAMARAS, its affiliated
organizations and its leaders, the Government referred to the information it provided to
the Governing Body during its 329th Session (March 2017). Furthermore, in its
observations, the Government affirmed that: (i) the various measures that allegedly
constituted attacks on various business sectors were not arbitrary and were carried out
in accordance with the law and with the goal of protecting the population (in relation
to allegations of arrests and intimidation of leaders and shareholders of a consortium
of credit card transaction companies, the Government indicates that upon proof that
faults in the electronic payment platform had been deliberately caused as a form of
financial sabotage, the competent authorities proceeded to arrest the perpetrators, and
that it was in no way an act of intimidation against Venezuelan businessmen); (ii) the
purchase of 50 per cent of agro-industrial production was carried out in accordance with
the constitutional mandate to ensure the availability of commodities within the context
of economic warfare and the creation of WPBs was carried out to promote the
participation of the working class in the management of production, without replacing or
opposing the trade union organization; and (iii) the increase in the cestaticket (food
voucher) was the result of its natural annual adjustment and the MPPPST had asked
FEDECAMARAS, in its communication dated 14 February 2017, to submit its proposals
concerning the salary increase that was customary for Labour Day. The replies, received
from FEDECAMARAS on 23 and 27 April 2017, did not contain any concrete proposals.
- 696. In its communication dated 29 September 2017, the Government sent
its observations concerning the aforementioned recommendations of the Committee.
- 697. Concerning recommendation (a), the Government once again denies that
FEDECAMARAS, its affiliates or its leaders have been persecuted, pressured, threatened
or subjected to any act of violence as a result of their condition and exercise of trade
union activity. The Government alleges that it has not refused to recognize FEDECAMARAS
as one of the most representative employers’ organizations. The Government argues that,
however, while at the international level FEDECAMARAS wishes to legitimize its status as
a representative organization of employers, at the national level it acts as a political
organization in opposition to the legitimately elected Government. The Government
submits that the acquiescence of FEDECAMARAS with regard to the destabilizing political
activities that have been taking place in the country since April 2017 was clear and
evident, in an attempt to disregard the institutional framework and forcefully put an
end to the established constitutional order, ignoring the democratically elected
authorities. It also alleges that FEDECAMARAS made public calls to suspend the election
process of the National Constituent Assembly on 30 July 2017. Based on these arguments,
the Government once again requests the Committee to stop examining these matters, which
it considers to fall outside its scope, and that particular political interests should
no longer be allowed to be used in the campaign of attacks against the Bolivarian
Republic of Venezuela.
- 698. With regard to recommendation (b) of its previous examination of the
case, the Government reiterates that since September 2015, by virtue of a final ruling,
which is currently being enforced, the perpetrator of the acts that took place in 2010
against the representatives of FEDECAMARAS was sentenced to 14 years and eight months’
imprisonment. The Government indicates that the facts in question were chance acts
completely unrelated to the trade union status of the affected persons, and therefore
requests the Committee to refrain from further examining this matter. As regards the
granting of compensation to FEDECAMARAS and the leaders concerned in the case, the
Government indicates that it will act to the extent appropriate and where so determined
by a final judicial ruling.
- 699. With regard to recommendations (c) and (d) of its previous
consideration of the case, the Committee notes that the Government emphasizes its
commitment to advancing consensus and dialogue in maintaining peace. The Government
emphasizes that FEDECAMARAS has been invited by the highest Governmental bodies to join
the honest and politically disinterested dialogue at a time when individual economic and
political interests, both internal and external, attempt to ignore the institutional
framework and the rule of law in the country. In this regard, the Government transmits
its response to the communication of 2 August 2017 from FEDECAMARAS (reporting on the
appointment of the new Management Committee of this organization), in which the MPPPST
welcomed the suggestion of dialogue made by FEDECAMARAS in its letter. In this letter of
reply, the Minister calls on FEDECAMARAS to deal without distractions with the
contribution of the business sector in this process, as well as to renounce individual
and political interests that have historically been used to justify actions contrary to
the Constitution and the laws of the Republic (also inviting FEDECAMARAS to condemn any
action, internal or external, that contributes to the destabilization of the country or
attempts to infringe on national sovereignty). The Government indicates that the
National Constituent Assembly having been formed, the invitation for FEDECAMARAS to
participate remains open, free of demands and agendas. Nevertheless, the Government
reports that, unfortunately, FEDECAMARAS refuses to recognize the full powers of the
National Constituent Assembly and has disregarded the Government’s efforts to engage in
direct and honest bipartite dialogue.
- 700. The Government also recalls that, previously, at the 106th Session
of the International Labour Conference in June 2017, the Minister of MPPPST requested
the support of the Director-General to hold a tripartite meeting at ILO headquarters in
the presence of his representatives, in addition to the representatives of FEDECAMARAS
and the Bolivarian Socialist Confederation of Urban, Rural and Fisheries Workers (CBST),
as the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations in the country. The
Government indicates that, unfortunately, FEDECAMARAS, ignoring, with a hint of
arrogance, the CBST as the most representative workers’ organization and claiming that
it has political ties with the Government, coupled with the destabilizing situation that
was emerging in the country at that time, decided not to attend the meeting a few
minutes before its commencement. The Government emphasizes that this attitude is at odds
with FEDECAMARAS’ continual and constant requests to the ILO for technical assistance
for the implementation of social dialogue with the Government.
- 701. With regard to recommendation (e) of its previous examination of the
case, the Government provides, in relation to the case of the meat processing company,
the following information on the criminal investigations initiated: (i) in March 2015,
charges were filed against Ms Tania Carolina Salinas Rebolledo and Ms Delia Isabel Rivas
Colina in relation to the commission of the crimes of speculation, boycotting,
fraudulently misrepresenting the quality of goods, price rigging, selling expired
foodstuffs and criminal conspiracy; these persons are currently waiting for the relevant
preliminary hearing to be held while their bank accounts have been suspended and frozen
as a result of a provisional injunction granted at the national level; (ii) Ms Delia
Isabel Rivas Colina, as well as Ms Anllerlin Guadalupe López Graterol, Mr Yolman Javier
Valderrama and Mr Ernesto Luis Arenad Pulgar are subject to precautionary measures
alternative to imprisonment; and (iii) a preventive detention measure was imposed on Ms
Tania Carolina Salinas Rebolledo (who is a fugitive from justice). Regarding the
supermarket chain, the Government reports that: (i) in May 2015 charges were brought
against Mr Manuel Andrés Morales Ordosgoitti and Mr Tadeo Arriechi Franco for the
commission of the crimes of boycotting and destabilization of the economy; (ii) in
November 2015, the competent court replaced the detention of accused persons with
alternative precautionary measures; (iii) on 23 January 2017 the preliminary hearing was
held and the court ordered the closing of the case (and consequently the cessation of
the precautionary measures ordered); and (iv) the Public Prosecutors’ Office filed an
appeal against the decision ordering the closing of the case on 30 January 2017.
- 702. With regard to recommendation (f) of its previous consideration of
the case, the Government indicates that, as the ILO is aware, the Government has
conducted consultations and convened meetings on the issue of wages and other labour
matters with the participation of workers’ and employers’ organizations (including
FEDECAMARAS and its affiliated organizations) but FEDECAMARAS has refused to take part
in those consultations and meetings and has ignored this dialogue, acting in a way that
is not in accordance with the law, showing no respect or consideration for the other
participating sectors. The Government refers in particular to FEDECAMARAS’ refusal to
take part in the dialogue to which it has been invited, within the framework of the work
of the National Constituent Assembly, to contribute to the country’s economic and social
development (the Government refers to the decree of 31 August of the National
Constituent Assembly calling for a national constituent dialogue of the productive
sectors throughout the country). The Government states that the fact that there has been
no progress on social dialogue in the country was due to the expression by FEDECAMARAS
of political-partisan interests, which are unrelated to labour and business matters and
not in accordance with the constitutional and legal order. In this regard, it points out
that FEDECAMARAS has refused to engage in dialogue with the Government and the most
representative workers’ organizations (remembering that it did not participate in the
ILO-sponsored meeting during the International Labour Conference in 2017). The
Government expresses the hope that FEDECAMARAS recognize the institutional framework of
the country and leaves the door open to engage in dialogue in conditions of public
recognition, either within the framework of the National Constituent Assembly or any
other governmental body.
- 703. Finally, the Government indicates that it reserves the opportunity
to continue to report on the other conclusions and recommendations of the Committee,
while at the same time stating that it does not agree with them and that it will expand
its reply in due course.
D. The Committee’s conclusions
D. The Committee’s conclusions- 704. As regards recommendation (a) from its previous examination of the
case (allegations of stigmatization and intimidation by the Bolivarian authorities,
groups and organizations directed against FEDECAMARAS, its member organizations, its
leaders and affiliated companies), the Committee notes with deep regret that the
Government is again using its reply to accuse the complainant organization to be linked
to those who carried out destabilizing actions in the country and gives no indication
that it has taken any measures to prevent acts and statements of stigmatization and
intimidation, as the Committee recommended. The Committee notes once again with regret
the persistence of attacks, threats and interference in the country’s employer sector
and against its leaders, impairing the capacity of the employers’ organizations to
defend the interests of their members. Under these circumstances, the Committee regrets
that it must reiterate its previous recommendation and urges the Government to take the
requested measures without delay. In this regard, the Committee is bound to reiterate
that for the contribution of trade unions and employers’ organizations to be properly
useful and credible, they must be able to carry out their activities in a climate of
freedom and security. This implies that, in so far as they may consider that they do not
have the basic freedom to fulfil their mission directly, trade unions and employers’
organizations would be justified in demanding that these freedoms and the right to
exercise them be recognized and that these demands be considered as coming within the
scope of legitimate trade union activities [see Digest of decisions and principles of
the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth (revised) edition, 2006, para. 36]. The
Committee again notes that, throughout its examination of this case, it has been witness
to many serious accusations levelled against FEDECAMARAS by the Government and has noted
with great concern the many allegations of attacks against this organization,
emphasizing that, taken as a whole, these allegations create a climate of intimidation
of employers’ organizations and their leaders that is incompatible with the requirements
of Convention No. 87. In this regard, the Committee regrets that it is bound to recall
once again the principle whereby the rights of workers’ and employers’ organizations can
only be exercised in a climate that is free from violence, pressure or threats of any
kind against the leaders and members of these organizations, and it is for governments
to ensure that this principle is respected [see Digest, op. cit., para. 44]. It firmly
urges the Government to take all the necessary measures in this regard and with a view
to the promotion of social dialogue based on respect. The Committee recalls that,
according to the Declaration of Philadelphia, which is part of the ILO Constitution, the
war against want requires to be carried on by an effort in which the representatives of
workers and employers, enjoying equal status with those of governments, join with them
in free discussion and democratic decision with a view to the promotion of the common
welfare.
- 705. As regards recommendation (b) from its previous examination of the
case (allegations of violence, specifically, the abduction and mistreatment of
FEDECAMARAS leaders Mr Noel Álvarez, Mr Luis Villegas, Mr Ernesto Villamil and Ms Albis
Muñoz in 2010), the Committee regrets that the Government neither sends, despite
repeated requests by it, a copy of the ruling issued (in its previous examination of the
case, the Government indicated that it had sent a request to the Public Prosecutor’s
Office to obtain a copy thereof) nor provides more detailed information on the granting
of compensation. The Committee urges the Government to send it a copy of the ruling
issued and to state whether other people were charged (providing information on any
related proceedings and the outcome thereof). The Committee also requests the Government
to inform it of the status and possible outcome of any claims or judicial proceedings
(submitting a copy of any relevant judgments) relating to the granting of compensation
to FEDECAMARAS and the leaders concerned for the damage caused by these illegal acts. As
regards the February 2008 bomb attack on FEDECAMARAS headquarters, the Committee regrets
that it has not received any reply from the Government and again insists that the
Government send its observations on the points raised by FEDECAMARAS and, in particular,
on the outcome of the appeal against the closing of the case and on any investigation
carried out in order to determine whether anyone else was involved in the attack, and
thus to shed light on its motive and to prevent any recurrence.
- 706. Recommendations (c) and (d) of the previous examination of the case
by the Committee concern: the establishment of structured bodies for bipartite and
tripartite social dialogue and an action plan, with a view to resolving all outstanding
issues, including issues relating to the seizure of farms, land recoveries, occupations
and expropriations to the detriment of current or former employers’ leaders, as well as
actions that create a climate of trust based on respect for employers’ and trade union
organizations with a view to promoting solid and stable industrial relations. The
Committee observes that the Government provides information on an attempt to hold a
tripartite meeting during the International Labour Conference and indicates that it has
invited FEDECAMARAS to join the dialogue processes relating to the transformation and
reorganization of the State, which are linked to the work of the National Constituent
Assembly. Furthermore, the Committee notes that the complainant organizations still
report that there is no effective dialogue beyond certain formal exchanges and reiterate
that there have been no dialogue processes in the country to which the Government had
committed itself before the Governing Body of the ILO. The Committee notes with regret
that, beyond the attempt to hold a meeting during the International Labour Conference,
it is not apparent from information provided by the Government that it has followed up
on the measures it had announced before the ILO Governing Body (an action plan that
provided for the establishment of a round table for dialogue between representatives of
the Government and of FEDECAMARAS, with a schedule of fortnightly meetings and the
inclusion of FEDECAMARAS in the future socio economic dialogue round table). The
Committee also notes with regret that the Government does not report having taking any
concrete steps to follow up on the Committee’s recommendations concerning the
establishment of structured bodies for bipartite and tripartite social dialogue, as well
as an action plan to be established in consultation with the social partners with stages
and specific time frames for implementation with the technical assistance of the ILO –
an action plan recommended since 2014 by the Governing Body as a result of the
high-level tripartite mission. While deeply deploring the lack of information and
progress in this regard and in light of the Governing Body’s decision of 24 March 2017
(in the examination of a complaint presented by virtue of article 26 of the ILO
Constitution against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela alleging non-compliance with
Conventions Nos 26, 87 and 144), in which the Government was urged to institutionalize
without delay a tripartite round table, with the presence of the ILO, to foster social
dialogue for the resolution of all pending issues, including matters relating to the
seizure of farms, land recoveries, occupations and expropriations to the detriment of
current or former employers’ leaders, the Committee reiterates its recommendation and
insists on the urgency of the Government taking the requested measures without delay,
including taking immediate action to create a climate of trust based on respect for
employers’ and trade union organizations with a view to promoting solid and stable
industrial relations.
- 707. As regards recommendation (e) from its previous examination of the
case (allegations of detention and trial of employers and leaders in various sectors),
the Committee takes due note of the fact that, in relation to the supermarket chain, the
cases against the accused were closed (the preventive detention measures against them
have consequently been lifted) but that the Prosecutor’s Office appealed the decision in
January 2017. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the outcome
of this appeal. With regard to the meat processing company, the Committee notes that,
while some of the charges against some of those under investigation are specified, the
Government does not indicate, as requested by the Committee, the specific allegations
against each of the people under investigation or trial by the judicial authorities. The
Committee is therefore bound to reiterate its previous recommendation and urges the
Government to provide precise information on the progress of the respective judicial
proceedings. Noting that only one preventive detention would remain in force, the
Committee calls on the authorities to consider lifting or replacing this preventive
detention measure. Finally, regarding the complainants’ allegations of 8 May 2011
(assaults and arrests of leaders, employees and shareholders of a consortium of credit
card transaction companies by government authorities, subjecting them to public ridicule
without guaranteeing due process and their right of defence), the Committee notes that
the Government indicates that the acts in question were a response to financial
sabotage, that the competent authorities proceeded to arrest the perpetrators, and that
it was in no way an act of intimidation against businessmen. In the absence of more
detailed information and in the light of the grave nature of the allegations, the
Committee invites the complainant organizations to provide any additional information at
their disposal and requests the Government to send a detailed reply in the light of such
information, indicating the specific allegations against each of the persons under
investigation or trial and to provide information on the progress and status of the
judicial proceedings concerned.
- 708. As regards recommendation (f) from its previous examination of the
case (referring to the holding of full consultations with the most representative
workers’ and employers’ organizations, including FEDECAMARAS, on draft legislation
covering labour, economic or social matters that affect their interests and those of
their members), the Committee notes that, with regard to consultations at the national
level, the Government indicated that it had requested FEDECAMARAS to provide in writing
comments on the increase in the minimum wage and that, in its most recent observations,
it referred to a broad call for dialogue with the productive sectors within the
framework of the Constituent National Assembly. Furthermore, the Committee notes that
complainant organizations continue to denounce the lack of effective dialogue (in
relation to the invitation to provide comments on the increase in the minimum wage,
FEDECAMARAS indicates that it was unable to make specific considerations, as the
Government did not transmit to it any specific terms or elements on the increase under
consideration, and therefore the increase was approved without consultation). The
Committee emphasizes that it is important that consultations take place in good faith,
confidence and mutual respect, and that the parties have sufficient time to express
their views and discuss them in full with a view to reaching a suitable compromise. The
Government must also ensure that it attaches the necessary importance to agreements
reached between workers’ and employers’ organizations [see Digest, op. cit., para.
1071]. The Committee further notes that, as claimed by the complainant organizations and
not denied by the Government, important governmental measures affecting the interests of
employers’ organizations, such as the establishment of Workers’ Production Boards
(WPBs), have continued to be taken without consultation with the social partners
concerned, including FEDECAMARAS. Deeply deploring the persistent nature of this
situation, the Committee firmly urges that full consultations on draft legislation
covering labour, economic or social matters that affect their interests and those of
their members be held without delay with the most representative workers’ and employers’
organizations, including FEDECAMARAS.
- 709. The Committee also notes with concern the allegations of the
complainant organizations regarding the establishment, without consultation, of bodies
that would infringe on the freedom of association, in particular the WPBs (formed of
three employees’ representatives from the enterprise and four from the State, and which
is in charge of reviewing, approving, controlling and monitoring the fundamental
programmes and projects of the productive process of the work entities), as an
additional mechanism of state interference. The complainant organizations also refer to
other strategies and institutions for state interference (like the General Staff of the
Working Class (a government organization to strengthen the WPBs) and the Labour Feminist
Brigades (a body to promote control of the entire social process of work in each
company)). The Committee takes note that the Government states that: (i) WPBs are an
institution in accordance with the Organic Labour and Workers Act which was established
to promote the participation of the working class as a key actor in the management of
production; and (ii) that the creation of WPBs in no way replaces or opposes the trade
union organization, but rather it is conceived as a form of primary participation of
workers in the real and effective monitoring of the productive processes of their work
entities. The Committee notes with great concern, however, that Decree No. 17 of 8
November 2016 establishing the WPBs, which is applicable to all labour entities in the
country, both public and private and issued under the state of emergency for economic
hardship states in its preamble, with a view to justifying the introduction of the WPBs,
that: (i) “the Ministry ... has the obligation to organize the working class starting
from the work entities themselves”; (ii) Article 1 states that the scope and purpose of
the WPBs is “to promote the participation of the working class as a key actor in the
management of production from both public and private work entities”; and (iii) that the
WPBs are created with a pre-established composition that comprises representatives of
the public authorities, including the armed forces and the Bolivarian militias. The
Committee considers that the establishment of the WPBs constitutes a violation of the
freedom of association and an interference in the free development of collective
relations between workers’ organizations and employers and their organizations. The
Committee is bound to recall that a government should not adopt measures such as the
creation by decree of institutions to organize workers into bodies established and
controlled by public authorities, which may interfere with the right of workers to
organize freely and the freedom of negotiation between independent organizations of
workers and of employers. In this regard, the Committee considers that the establishment
of public bodies that may involve government control over the representation of the
workers’ sector also constitutes interference in the freedom of action and of
negotiation of the employers and their organizations and is incompatible with the
principles of freedom of association and collective bargaining. The Committee urges the
Government to take the necessary measures, including the repeal or reform of regulations
or legislation with a view to eliminating any institutions or provisions established or
promoted by public authorities – including the WPBs or other bodies such as the General
Staff of the Working Class and the Labour Feminist Brigades – which may supplant
independent trade union organizations or interfere in the freedom of negotiation between
independent workers’ organizations and employers’ organizations. In view of the fact
that the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela has ratified Conventions Nos 87 and 98, the
Committee refers the legislative aspects of this case to the Committee of Experts on the
Application of Conventions and Recommendations (CEACR) and requests the Government to
keep the CEARC informed of any measures adopted in this regard.
The Committee’s recommendations
The Committee’s recommendations- 710. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee
invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
- (a)
Deploring the various and serious forms of stigmatization and intimidation by the
Bolivarian authorities, groups and organizations directed against FEDECAMARAS, its
member organizations, their leaders and affiliated companies, the Committee insists
on the urgency of the Government taking strong measures to prevent such actions and
statements against individuals and organizations that are legitimately defending
their interests under Conventions Nos 87 and 98, which have been ratified by the
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. The Committee strongly urges the Government to
take all necessary measures to ensure that FEDECAMARAS is able to exercise its
rights as an employers’ organization in a climate that is free from violence,
pressure or threats of any kind against its leaders and members and to promote,
together with that organization, social dialogue based on respect.
- (b) As
regards the abduction and mistreatment in 2010 of FEDECAMARAS leaders Mr Noel
Álvarez, Mr Luis Villegas, Mr Ernesto Villamil and Ms Albis Muñoz (the latter
sustained three bullet wounds), the Committee once again urges the Government to
send a copy of the ruling by which the accused was sentenced and to state whether
other people were charged (providing information on any related proceedings and the
outcome thereof). The Committee also requests the Government to inform it of the
status and possible outcome of any complaint or judicial proceedings (sending a copy
of any relevant ruling) relating to the granting of compensation to FEDECAMARAS and
the leaders concerned for the damage caused by these illegal acts. As regards the
February 2008 bomb attack on FEDECAMARAS headquarters, the Committee again insists
that the Government send its observations on the points raised by FEDECAMARAS and,
in particular, on the outcome of the appeal against the closing of the case and on
any investigation carried out in order to determine whether anyone else was involved
in the attack, and thus to shed light on its motive and to prevent any
recurrence.
- (c) As regards the structured bodies for bipartite and
tripartite social dialogue that need to be established in the country; the plan of
action to be established in consultation with the social partners with stages and
specific time frames for implementation with the technical assistance of the ILO, as
recommended by the Governing Body; and the seizure of farms, land recoveries,
occupations and expropriations to the detriment of current or former employers’
leaders, the Committee deeply deplores the lack of information and further progress
in this regard. It recalls that the conclusions of the high-level tripartite mission
conducted in 2014 refer to a round table between the Government and FEDECAMARAS,
with the presence of the ILO, and a tripartite dialogue round table, with the
participation of the ILO and an independent chairperson. The Committee also recalls
that at its March 2017 session, in examining the complaint presented under article
26 of the ILO Constitution against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela alleging
non-compliance with Conventions Nos 26, 87 and 144, the Governing Body urged the
Government to institutionalize without delay a tripartite round table, with the
presence of the ILO, to foster social dialogue for the resolution of all pending
issues, including matters relating to the seizure of farms, land recoveries,
occupations and expropriations to the detriment of current or former employers’
leaders. The Committee insists once again on the urgency of the Government adopting
immediately tangible measures with regard to bipartite and tripartite social
dialogue as requested by the high-level tripartite mission and the Governing Body.
Deeply deploring once again that the Government has not yet provided the requested
plan of action, the Committee once again urges it to implement fully without delay
the conclusions of the high-level tripartite mission endorsed by the Governing Body
and to report thereon.
- (d) The Committee, in line with the conclusions of
the high-level tripartite mission, again urges the Government to take immediate
action to create a climate of trust based on respect for employers’ and trade union
organizations with a view to promoting solid and stable industrial relations. The
Committee urges the Government to inform it of any measures taken in this
regard.
- (e) As regards the criminal investigations concerning the meat
processing company, the Committee urges the Government not merely to give an
indication of general criminal offences but to indicate the specific allegations
against each of the people under investigation or trial by the judicial authorities
and to provide precise information on the progress of the respective judicial
proceedings. Furthermore, the Committee requests the competent authorities to
consider lifting or replacing the only preventive detention measure in the framework
of those investigations. The Committee also requests the Government to keep it
informed of the outcome of the Prosecutor’s Office’s appeal against the judicial
decision to close the criminal investigations concerning the supermarket chain. In
relation to allegations of assault and detention of leaders and shareholders of a
consortium of credit card transaction companies, the Committee invites the
complainant organizations to provide any additional information at their disposal
and requests the Government to send a detailed reply in the light of such
information, indicating the specific allegations against each of the persons under
investigation or trial and to provide information on the progress and status of the
judicial proceedings concerned.
- (f) The Committee firmly urges that full
consultations on draft legislation covering labour, economic or social matters that
affect their interests and those of their members be held without delay with the
most representative workers’ and employers’ organizations, including
FEDECAMARAS.
- (g) The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary
measures, including the repeal or reform of regulations or legislation with a view
to eliminating any institutions or provisions established or promoted by public
authorities – including the WPBs or other bodies such as the General Staff of the
Working Class and the Labour Feminist Brigades – which may supplant independent
trade union organizations or interfere in the freedom of negotiation between
independent organizations of workers and of employers. In view of the fact that the
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela has ratified Conventions Nos 87 and 98, the
Committee refers the legislative aspects of this case to the Committee of Experts on
the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (CEACR) and requests the
Government to keep the CEARC informed of any measures adopted in this
regard.
- (h) The Committee expresses its deep concern at the lack of
information and progress on the above issues and urges the Government to take all
the requested measures without delay.
- (i) The Committee draws the special
attention of the Governing Body to the extremely serious and urgent nature of this
case.